I submitted my status on the 7 summits on the link you provided me. I know, I know, there was a lot of debate and questions on this forum, when I climbed Vinson last December 2006, whether I finished the 7 summits or not. I wanted to wait until i finish my website www.7ContinentSummits.com until I discuss it with the world.

In my opinion, there are 3 versions of the 7 summits: Carstensz and Kosciusko have been accepted for 20 years now and should still be accepted. but there is a third version that I think should be accepted: Mt Wilhelm in Papua New Guinea. Check almost ANY atlas or check my website for links to National Geographic, United Nations, and more.

As far as Denali, Robert Williams, Ben Barranko, and I thought we reached the summit in June 2004, in a white-out snowstorm at 2 in the morning and we were in great condition. We told the park rangers exactly where we were with a picture of a bench mark, and they said they will count us as summitting.

But recent events have led me to believe we did NOT reach the actual summit. We now think we were on a false summit just 10 minutes of the actual summit. So I plan to go back to climb Denali in 2008 and also 2009. My passion is the 7 Summits!!

thanks for the notes and honesty. It appears that you climbed just a point on the ridge of Denali. It is great that you are going back, so you never have to be in doubt about what you climbed.

About Wilhelm: it is very cool that you climbed it. I definitely think that it is a better candidate than Mt Cook, as it has the same reasoning behind it and is simply higher But Carstensz is on the same continent/island as Wilhelm, so for me and all the others it is just the question of which continent it actually is, i.e. if Carstensz or Kozzie is the one..

Cheers my friends,

Harry

Logged

"He who climbs upon the highest mountains laughs at all tragedies, real or imaginary." -- Friedrich Nietzsche

Just like one of my climbing partners on that Denali trip is going back in 2008 (Bob Williams aka Frodo), my plan is to go back in 2008 AND 2009. I am now convinced I did not summit. The reason I will go back in 08 AND 09 is I have several friends that have asked me to be a part of their team. I do not think I want to mix these friends on the same Denali team. I do want to make sure that I summit in 08 though, and if I have to go solo, I will. MC, maybe you can join the team in 09? My philosophy is that the team should discuss ahead of time all options if someone gets sick or tired. Of course, safety is first, but I believe safety and success can both be achieved.

AS far as what constitutes a summit, I think that you need to believe yourself that you were on the summit (not what a guide, the park rangers, other climbers tell you), so this is why I am now going back for sure.

AS far as the Oceania thing, I truly believe Wilhelm is the highest, so I am okay with that. I will certainly climb Kosciusko as well as that was my plan all along, as I have had separate plans to go with good friends (Tanya) and past girlfriends (Breanna), but it just got delayed.

But Harry, as mentioned, I believe ALL 3 versions have good merit and will stand the test of time.

I am really happy that the 7 summits passion is alive and well. If you think about it, it was just over 20 years ago that Dick Bass started the dream for all of us. So in the whole realm of things, the 7 summits is just in the beginning stage.

Denali in '09 is a possibility and Dave is even open to me going!!! I'm doing Adams this spring (great group of climbers I've hooked up with), Hood in June, Rainier (Dan Mazur's Glacier School) July 5th, Pico de Orizaba next fall and I'd like to do Baker just before attempting Denali in '09. Denali would be a big challenge for me so much is dependent on my physical condition at that time. Let's keep the dialog open on this one!

MC

« Last Edit: Feb 1 2008, 23:50 by m.c. reinhardt »

Logged

"I go to the mountains for there I find higher ground." m.c. reinhardt

But it can be done SAFELY and SUCCESSFULLY, if you have the right knowledge, skills, experience, proper gear, proper training, stay healthy, be patient with weather, and have the right mental fortitude! YOU HAVE TO WANT IT!

I submitted my status on the 7 summits on the link you provided me. I know, I know, there was a lot of debate and questions on this forum, when I climbed Vinson last December 2006, whether I finished the 7 summits or not. I wanted to wait until i finish my website www.7ContinentSummits.com until I discuss it with the world.

In my opinion, there are 3 versions of the 7 summits: Carstensz and Kosciusko have been accepted for 20 years now and should still be accepted. but there is a third version that I think should be accepted: Mt Wilhelm in Papua New Guinea. Check almost ANY atlas or check my website for links to National Geographic, United Nations, and more.

Mountain John

Nice website so far - interesting debate regarding Wilhelm too! Hadn't considered that third option. Why not climb all 3 versions (Just to be sure). Couldn't help noticing Carstensz described as a day hike - I assume that's a typo?

Also there's another spanner to throw into the works (although lower than Wilhelm and Carstensz). It's a little-known fact that the highest point on Australian territory is actually Mawson's Peak. Located on Heard Island, Mawson's Peak is 2745 metres high and forms the summit of an active volcano called Big Ben. Heard Island is well south of the Australian continent (73°30' East, 53°05' South), approaching the coast of Antarctica in the Southern Ocean. (For the REALLY pedantic types who want to climb the highest in Australian territory. Also there might be some antractic Australian territory peaks - these aren't in Oceania though.The highest recognised mountains in the Australian Antarctic Territory are Mt McClintock (eastern sector - 3490m) and Mt Menzies (western sector - 3355m). Elevations in excess of 4000m exist in the western sector, in the vicinity of 82°E 56°S, and although these are generally not considered mountains, the definition is frequently debated.

Hey you guys put together a Denali group I would like to be kept in the know. 09 would be perfect for me bcuz I am doing Baker and Rainier this year so I would be fully stoked to get in on Denali with a good bunch of cat's. Terry Hackaday (hackaday1@hotmail.com) 319-795-4321. 10 Suncrest Keokuk, Iowa 52632 Thanks alot for considering me .... Terry

thanks for your interest. yes, 09 is up in the air. I have a friend, Adam that is co-organizing that trip. I will ask him (since i don't have mine handy) to send you a mountaineering climbing resume. At your leisure, you could fill it out and e-mail it to us. this is good to have anyway so you can look at it and determine what skills you might want to work on. Mountain John

Always the same debate about the highest in Oceania. I have to side with Harry on this one, Carstensz is on the same island as Wilhelm. it doesn't make a difference to me if it is in a different country. We are talking about continents, not countries. And I've done Carstensz and not Wilhelm

About Denali 09, I'm leaving for Denali on May 10 for number 6 of 7. If I don't make it this year (so far the first 5 were summited on the first try, I have good karma), I might want to join your group in 09. It would be nice to see and climb with you guys after a couple of years ofdiscussing on the web.

I have exchanged several e-mails with Mountain John on this topic. We agree to disagree.

Imo, the commercial atlases and publications that he cites prefer to copy each other, errors and all, than to carry out their own research and checks.

I oppose the case for the continental partition of the island New Guinea. It makes no geographical sense, and I oppose it on cultural grounds too, because the local population is of the same Papuan stock on both sides of the political division (West Papua and PNG). The term "continent" is, or should be, geographical, not political. Continental divisions do not need to follow international borders.

Infact, there are strong geographical grounds for challenging the claim that Elbrus is in Europe; the natural, geographical intercontinental border runs north of the Caucasus. But such a challenge would be resisted on cultural grounds by the Georgians and Armenians, who consider themselves European. There is no such conflict in New Guinea.

Some atlases or references do copy others, Jonathan is correct there. For instance, Reader's Digest does NOT have their own cartographers, and that is why I do not reference them as an arbitrary source.

What some people fail to realize is that most of these sources have their OWN cartographers. They would be insulted to hear they do not do their own research. I have 30 atlases so I would know. They list their cartographers of course. Who else has 30 DIFFERENT atlases to reference? Of course, an atlas like "Barnes and Noble" is another one that does NOT have their own cartographers.

But the balance of references are highly reputable. Certainly more than a website like Wikipedia that ANY person can enter information, and it becomes fact instantly??. All sources can make errors (mainly minor errors like elevation) but Wikipedia should always be cross checked by another source.

As far as the partitioning of New Guinea, that is what the geographical sources, cartographers, and atlas makers report. SEE POSTING UNDER "NEWS": AUSTRALIA/OCEANIA CONTINENT DEBATE. As far as Elbrus, that is also covered in that post, and is related.

The prestigious Times Atlas (1994 edition) repeats the claims that Carstensz and Ulugh Muztagh are 5030m and 7723m respectively despite the fact that they were re-surveyed in 1971 and 1985 respectively. See Wikipedia for more details. So publications that employ their own cartographers do copy misinformation.

Some aspects to consider while people think of rational arguments in their favour:

1: Emotions: the "how dare an amateur climber / business man like Dick Bass be the first to achieve the 7 summits" argument

2: Ego: the "if I (Reinhold Messner) am denied a spot on Bass's Vinson ascent, i could undermine his 7 summits achievement by claiming Carstensz is the real one" argument

3: Money: the "there's no 15k per client to be made guiding people up Kosckiuszko" argument

Disclosure: i believe Kosciuszko is the 7th summit (based on rational arguments + the fact that Bass - for better or worse - "created" the concept of the 7 summits in most peoples minds) but will climb both K and CP. Yesterday I actually summited Kosciuszko... cold, windy, foggy... and glad i started early because later in the day there was torrential rainfall, thunder and lightning... which left me shaking my head about the people still up there wearing sandals, t-shirts, etc. (one couple even making slow progress pushing a baby stroller with a little one it forward...)

I will (eventually) also climb CP... but after I've done Everest as nr 7.